Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology

Making a structural cross section 0: datums, depths, and elevations

0 DF 450' ASL
DF 380' ASL 0
100
DF 230' ASL
Drilling floor 100
200 0
200
300 100
300
400 200 Sea level
400
500 300
Depths in each hole, and thus 500
600 400
Elevations depths marked on logs
relative to 600
700 sea level 500
700
800 600
800
900 700 Possible cross-section datum 500' subsea
900
On this well's log, 1000 On this well's log,
800
a cross-section datum a cross-section datum 1000
at 500' subsea is at 1100 at 500' subsea is at
900
depth in well of depth in well of 1100
500' + 450' = 950' 1200 500' + 230' = 730'
1000
1200
Elevation of 1300 1100
log datum 1300
1400 1200 Elevation of
Elevation of cross-section datum
cross-section datum subsea 1400
1500 1300
subsea Elevation of
log datum 1500
1600 1400
1600
1500
 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology
Making a structural cross section I: datum correction
This page and three that follow it will show the hanging
and initial construction of a structural cross-section.

For each log, one's first task is to
determine the elevation of the log's
datum, the vertical elevation against
which all depths on the log were
measured. On wells where a Kelly
bushing was used, the datum is com-
monly the Kelly bushing (KB). Another
Datum 19 + 96 = 115' asl option is the drilling floor (DF).
Many loggers just show the elevation of the log's
datum relative to sea level. Gesundklotz is less kind
and requires us to add the elevation of the datum above
the land surface and the elevation of the land surface
relative to sea level to get the elevation of the log's
datum above sea level.
Note that the word “datum” is used in
two senses here. The first is the datum
of the log: the vertical elevation against
which all depths on that particular log
were measured. The second is the
datum for the cross section: the hori-
zontal line onto which all logs will be
matched. On a structural cross section,
that datum is just some
convenient but necessarily
consistent elevation.

-500' datum Datum for cross section (Meaning #2 above)

500' subsea On this log, 500 feet below sea level

+ 115' asl datum of log is at a depth in the well of 615 feet,
615' depth of cross-section datum because the well's datum is 115 feet
above sea level.

For
For the
the algebraically
algebraically inclined:
inclined: (The relationship used here to
determine the depth in the well
depth in well = elevation of log datum + elevation subsea for the cross-section's datum)
or (The relationship used in Part II
elevation subsea = depth in well – elevation of log datum of this series to determine a “top”,
the elevation of the top of a
or stratigraphic unit)
elevation of log datum = depth in well – elevation subsea (A useless relationship shown only
to complete our algebraic trifecta)

In Part II of this series, we will add a second log to our cross

section, and in Parts III and IV we will make geological inferences.

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionI01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology
Making a structural cross section II: hanging
In Part I, we hung the
log on the left, and here
we add the log on the
right.

The procedure in Part I

Datum 20 + 110 = 130' asl
Datum 19 + 96 = 115' asl must be done for each
log as it is added to the
cross section.

-500' datum
500' subsea
500' subsea
+ 130' asl datum of log
+ 115' asl datum of log
630' depth of cross-section datum
615' depth of cross-section datum

This distance should

be to some consistent
horizontal scale as
more logs are added.
The best case is that the
horizontal scale is the
same as the vertical
scale, so that there is no
vertical exaggeration.

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionII01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology
Making a structural cross section III: marking tops
With our two-well
cross section hung,
we can begin to
mark stratigraphic
correlations, which
will in Part IV lead
to a simple structural
inference.

Datum 20 + 110 = 130' asl

Datum 19 + 96 = 115' asl

-500' datum
500' subsea
500' subsea
+ 130' asl datum of log
+ 115' asl datum of log
630' depth of cross-section datum
615' depth of cross-section datum

Top Bitma 980'

- 130' df
There's a PGSG page
850 ' subsea
on “Picking tops”.
Top Bitma 1130'
- 115' df
1015 ' subsea

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionIII01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology
Making a structural cross section IV: inferring structure
In Parts I, II , and III of
this series we made a
two-well cross section,
and here we make a
simple structural infer-
ence. Parts V to IX
work through a five-well
cross section that is
somewhat more repre-
sentative of meaningful
Datum 20 + 110 = 130' asl
Datum 19 + 96 = 115' asl cross sections.

-500' datum
500' subsea
500' subsea
+ 130' asl datum of log
+ 115' asl datum of log
630' depth of cross-section datum
615' depth of cross-section datum

Top Bitma 980'

- 130' df
850 ' subsea
Top Bitma 1130' A geological inference.
- 115' df
1015 ' subsea

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionIV01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology

Picking tops 1 2
Geologists have long recognized litho-
stratigraphic units and given them names
like “Old Red Sandstone” or “Garden City
Formation”. Subsurface geologists com-
monly extend recognition of these strati-
graphic units into the subsurface, or they
apply names or codes to stratigraphic units
known only from the subsurface. Recognition
of a stratigraphic unit typically involves
recognizing the top of the unit, or “picking
the top”.
In the example at right, a geologist has
marked and labeled his or her pick for the top
of fthe ictional Bitma Shale or Bitma Forma-
tion in Borehole 1. In this easy example, one
can readily find log excursions in Borehole 2,
like those marked in green and magenta,
to confirm the observation that the top of
the Bitma in Borehole 2 is at about 980'
downhole.
Thus far, the position of each pick is
expressed relative to the datum of the bore-
hole log. We commonly want to make
structural maps of tops. To do so, we need
to determine the position of the top rela-
tive to sea level. On the log of Borehole 1,
the geologist has done his or her arithmetic
on the log, subtracting the elevation of the
log's datum to arrive at the elevation of the
top of the Bitma relative to sea level. Old-
fashioned geologists worked this way on
paper and then transferred their tops to
a map; modern procedure would likely
involve entering the uncorrected tops of
many units into a database, subtracting
the datum elevation from all of them in
one swoop, and having maps plotted
with the tops (relative to sea level) shown
for each well. From there the geologist
would turn to contouring the structure
maps, the subject of yet another PG&SG
page.

LBR 4320PickingTops01.odg 9/2011

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology

Making a structural cross section V: a bigger picture

The previous four pages in this series looked this page we expand our scale, with the assumption that we
at how to hang well logs on the datum of a cross can put five wells on a cross section. The next four pages
section to make a structural cross section. With will make a structural interpretation – have any suggestions?

Datum of cross=section (line of equal elevation)

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionV01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology

Making a structural cross section VI: correlations

With our logs set up for a cross section logical first step is to make correlations from well and 4 – but we're having trouble tracing one
as done in Part V of this series, we're ready to well by matching patterns. The result suggests horizon through that apparent monocline,
to make some geological inferences. The a strange-looking monocline between Wells 3 and the monocline disappears deeper down.

Datum of cross=section (line of equal elevation)

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionVI01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology

Making a structural cross section VII: missing section

Our correlations in Part VI suggested that normal fault) or repeated section (evidence of a normal fault. . . . and we move on . . .
a fault is present in Well 3. The next thing to do reverse fault. Comparison of Well 3 with its
is to look for missing section (evidence of a neighbors indicates missing section, and thus a

Datum of cross=section (line of equal elevation)

? Missing in Well 3

Missing in Well 3 ?

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionVII01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology

Making a structural cross section VIII: missing section again

Our correlations in Part VI led to a search for section. The next thing to do is to look for miss-
missing section in Well 3 in Part VII. That search ing section in the other wells, and indeed there is
suggests that a normal fault is present in our cross demonstrably missing section in Wells 1, 2, and 4.

Datum of cross=section (line of equal elevation)

Missing in Well 4

? Missing in Well 3

Missing in Well 3 ?

Missing in Well 2

Missing in Well 1

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionVIII01.odg 6/2013

 Railsback's Petroleum Geoscience and Subsurface Geology

Making a structural cross section IX: a finished product

spaced very closely). Much more commonly, a
This page completes our series by showing nition of missing section in multiple wells. This fault cuts only one well, and finding the fault will
our cross section with a normal fault inferred from cross section is not realistic geologically because depend much more, if not solely, on recognition
the offset of our correlations and from our recog- the fault is a very-low-angle fault (or our wells are of missing section.

Datum of cross=section (line of equal elevation)

LBR PGSGMakingStructuralSectionIX01.odg 6/2013